The White Wolf wrote: » The difference would obviously be streaming views given how important that will be but how and ever.
larchielads wrote: » Hows the 4:3 suiting people who have watched it?
ManOfMystery wrote: » Overall, by the end of the film I had lots of questions - not for Zack Snyder, but for WB. Having seen this, you have to wonder why on earth they oped to make the decisions they did in 2016 - restrict it to 2hrs max, cut out all the great Cyborg stuff, make Steppenwolf totally generic and neutured, remove Darkseid completely, etc. So many questionable choices.
senordingdong wrote: » Was it 'WB' or just Kevin tsujihara?
senordingdong wrote: » Was it 'WB' or just Kevin tsujihara? I liked MOS but I can see why others wouldn't. Then bvs, which admittedly I like alot, did go further down the rabbit hole. I can understand why they were spooked.
ManOfMystery wrote: » Hard to know, but I assume with any company of that size there is more than one person calling all the shots. Geoff Johns had a lot of input to Whedon's one too. I loved MOS and liked the BvS UE, but if anything JL seems to have made slightly safer storyline choices than those films.
techdiver wrote: » Yeah from my reading of it was twofold. 1. Tsujihara wanted it shorter for more viewings in a day in the cinema. 2. He wasn't willing to delay as it would have effected his bonus. Whether you like Snyder or not it does seem that many Hollywood studios are ran by people who haven't a ****ing clue about movies. I always harp back to the Kevin Smith talk about the time he wrote a script for a Superman movie in the early 2000's. The complete idiots like Jon Peters in power at the time were mind boggling. It left me thinking how anything of any worth gets made in Hollywood. It's probably fine for the Spielberg's and Nolan's of the world as they wield quite an amount of power, but for up and coming movies makers it must be soul destroying having these fools butcher your art.
ManOfMystery wrote: » I really enjoyed it. It's long for sure, it has some flaws, and it often reverts to those Snyder tropes that for many of us are marmite (the slow-mo, the music, the aesthetics) in that we either love or hate tham as artistic choices. But overall? Really enjoyable. There's a genuinely good film in there, and the difference between this and Whedon's 2017 version is night and day despite the fact that the overall story structure is not really any difference. It's sitting at 78% on RT at the moment and whilst I often don't agree with the consensus on that site, for once it sounds about right. The characters are much better fleshed out - both the heroes and villains. There's more elaboration. The stakes feel more real. The film isn't humourless, but it utilises humour better and is less cheesy/cringy than the original cut. Overall, it feels more epic and Snyder's take on the mythology of heroes of the past gives it a very unique depth. Overall, by the end of the film I had lots of questions - not for Zack Snyder, but for WB. Having seen this, you have to wonder why on earth they oped to make the decisions they did in 2016 - restrict it to 2hrs max, cut out all the great Cyborg stuff, make Steppenwolf totally generic and neutured, remove Darkseid completely, etc. So many questionable choices.
Brief_Lives wrote: » I think it is easily DCs best movie to date. What were WB doing releasing that turkey in 2017. I agree about the slow mo crap, and the big epilogue, but some of the new stuff was genuinely the best thing DC have done, to date (as part of the DCEU, not the christian bale stuff). there's some real edgy stuff in the movie too, Marvel could never have made this movie.
techdiver wrote: » I see Sky claim the HD version is 21.6 GB, which I thought was a welcome surprise of a decent bitrate for Sky, but once downloaded it claims to only use 7.7 GB on the disk. I think I might "source" a better version. I'm not going to feel guilt as I already pay for the source of the movie where anyway. :P
Brief_Lives wrote: » What were WB doing releasing that turkey in 2017.